Privacy preserving between you and the third party, but the implication is that the government now sees what you are using.

▲

palata 4 hours ago | parent [-]

> but the implication is that the government now sees what you are using.

No. The whole point of privacy preserving technology is that they don't.

The idea is that the government checks your identity (they know who you are) and give you an anonymous cryptographic proof that you are above, say, 18. They don't know what you do with it.

You give this cryptographic proof to Discord, and they know that if you have access to that proof, then you have access to someone who is above 18. They don't know who you are.

Sure, you could ask an adult to give you a token. But you can also ask an adult to buy you alcohol or to do the age verification scan for you.

▲

plagiarist 3 hours ago | parent [-]

You cannot automate adults buying alcohol from a single ID for all the children in the nation.

If age tokens are truly anonymous, what's the solution for preventing a single person from generating and selling them to whatever child wants one?

	▲	palata 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The thing is that we go from "we don't check the age at all" to "children now need to work around an age verification" system. Seems like it will be harder for children, which is the goal. Then make it illegal to sell them. Some people will still do it, but children can already order cannabis over the internet. It's always a trade-off, it will never be perfect. But the status quo is not perfect either. The question is: is it better than the status quo? I think that age verification is not completely unreasonable (as long as it is made in a privacy-preserving manner). As a comparison, I think that ChatControl is completely unreasonable.